Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Koligman who wrote (74996)	3/1/1999 7:03:00 PM
From: Andreas	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

John, This article by Jim Seymour is a disgrace and in my view an embarrassment to the author. It consists of a lot of conjecture, speculation and little else. Lets look at his six signs. First, there is no credible evidence at this time that corporate purchases are declining beyond normal seasonal fluctuations. Indeed, most companies are alrady y2K compliant and for those that are not, compliance often times includes replacement rather than fixing existing hardware. Second, the numbers do not reflect that amd is finally getting the job done. Indeed, my sources indicate that recent price cuts on the celeron have resulted in increased orders to intc and fewer to amd in out months. The month of January does not a trend make! Third, the Piii does not compete with amd k6 (apples and oranges - different market segments). More specifically, look at celeron vs. amd. Fourth, the k7 in best case is not expected until 4th quarter. Intc, will be marketing 550 - 600 mhz by then. Fifth, ftc action is a non-event to anyone who understands this case. First, it is an administrative action which is substantially different from the civil case against msft in federal court. Little comparison in this arena. Overall, article is, imho, misleading and a self serving Cramer disgrace.

To: John Koligman who wrote (74996)	3/1/1999 10:58:00 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

John, >>>Consider six bad indicators for Intel: <<< Is that Jim Seymour (Medicine Man / Witch Doctor) trying to bring Intel down with propaganda rather than through legitimate analysis? 1. Market growth slows. . What market is this person talking about? He makes some lame generalizations. I could make generalizations too - that come to an opposite conclusion. The Internet is exploding. Home adoption rate is at 50% and growing in the US - can the rest of the world be that far behind. E-Commerce is just getting off the ground. If nothing else, Y2K highlights the enormity of (the market) and the problems caused by legacy systems that will get a temporary fix - and then has to be replaced - most likely by systems using mpu's whose standards will be defined by Intel. Companies will not send their IT systems and programming personnel home after they put in temporary fixes for Y2K and then go into hiatus before they plan on replacement of legacy systems. 2. AMD muscles in. Is Doctor Seymour trying to tell us that the FTC is using taxpayer money to file a frivolous suit agaist Intel. According to the FTC:>>>In Monday's filing, the FTC dismissed the importance of the shift at the low end. The agency said the market segment was a tiny part of the overall market and argued that AMD and Cyrix gained largely because Intel had ignored the cheaper computers.<<<. 3. CPU prices falling. . He is worse (or better) than any propagandist with an axe to grind. He makes two phoney assumptions and then comes out with a conclusion he had in mind to write about to begin with. <<<With that decline in demand, as market share erodes, Intel's prices are slipping faster than usual on that deadliest declining curve <<< I have yet to see any predictions that PC sales growth is less than double digit for this year, next year, or any time in the future. and is he also suggesting that the FTC is spending taxpayer money to try to prove that market share erosion is not significant when it is actually eroding significantly? As for prices slipping in the bottom 15% of the market (where AMD competes) is concerned - how about prices at the upper end where Xeons sell for from between $800 and $3600 and where AMD does not now or will anytime in the forseeable future compete in. 4. New product blahs. Is this some kind of scientific analysis of Intel's new product introductions? Without any supporting evidence , and after what seems like about 10 minutes of thought - he comes up with this sweeping conclusion. >>>Intel has made a big marketing bet on the Pentium III, which arrived last week to ... yawns and snores<<< He goes on and uses smear tactics they used against political enemies years ago when they waved a piece of paper suggestiing there was a list of allegations against their foes without any intention of ever showing anyone the paper they were waving: >>>Tests show this chip is only marginally faster than the existing .... <<< I doubt he has tests showing anything. I'll bet he doesn't and can't refer to even phoney and inconclusive tests to prove his point. I'll bet it is jest rhetorical tests that he is refering to. 5. Productus interruptus. What kind of an indicator is this? I suppose if we allow that new product blahs as an indicator of some kind - we have to allow Productus interruptus as indicator. Here, he makes some lame statements about PIII as being not a serious product and is here as a stop gap measure before Merced comes out. Here is a guy, Doctor Seymour, trying to pretend he knows something that he knows nothing about. At least Drew Peck, who makes a living on knowing about MPU's admits he doesn't understand the IA64 market. This muckraker is pretending he knows what he is talking about. 6. Fun with Andy and Craig on spring break. The Federal Trade Commission suit against Intel starts a week from tomorrow in Washington. In their suit against MSFT, DOJ is going up against a company run by kids. Very smart kids - but, still MSFT is company that is managed by very smart people that never really grew up. The FTC is going up against a company managed by grown ups. Very smart grown ups. What are they going to do, break up Intel? I don't think so, Doctor Seynour. Mary